Restoration of the Spinous Process Following Muscle-Preserving Posterior Lumbar Decompression via Sagittal Splitting of the Spinous Process

BACKGROUND: In lumbar spinal stenosis, spinous process-splitting decompression has demonstrated good clinical outcomes with preservation of the posterior ligamentous complex and paraspinal muscles in comparison to conventional laminectomy, but the radiological consequence and clinical impact of the split spinous processes have not been fully understood. METHODS: Seventy-three patients who underwent spinous process-splitting decompression were included. The bone union rate and pattern were evaluated by computed tomography performed 6–18 months after surgery and compared among subgroups divided according to the number of levels decompressed and the extent of spinous process splitting. The bone union pattern was classified into three categories: complete union, partial union, and nonunion. The visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and walking distance assessed both before and 24–36 months after surgery were compared among subgroups divided according to the union pattern of the split spinous process. RESULTS: Overall, the rates of complete union, partial union, and nonunion were 51.7%, 43.2%, and 5.1%, respectively. In the subgroup with partial splitting of the spinous process, the rates were 85.7%, 14.3%, and 0%, respectively; those of the subgroup with total splitting of the spinous process were 32.9%, 59.2%, and 7.9%, respectively. With single-level decompression, a higher rate of union was observed compared with multilevel decompression. The VAS, ODI, and walking distance were significantly improved after surgery and did not differ according to the degree of union of the split spinous process. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the single-level operation and partial splitting of the spinous process were favourable factors for obtaining complete restoration of the posterior bony structure of the lumbar spine in spinous process-splitting decompression.

Pitfalls and Important Issues in Testing Reliability Using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients in Orthopaedic Research

BACKGROUND: Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) provide a statistical means of testing the reliability. However, their interpretation is not well documented in the orthopedic field. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of ICCs in the orthopedic literature and to demonstrate pitfalls regarding their use. METHODS: First, orthopedic articles that used ICCs were retrieved from the Pubmed database, and journal demography, ICC models and concurrent statistics used were evaluated. Second, reliability test was performed on three common physical examinations in cerebral palsy, namely, the Thomas test, the Staheli test, and popliteal angle measurement. Thirty patients were assessed by three orthopedic surgeons to explore the statistical methods testing reliability. Third, the factors affecting the ICC values were examined by simulating the data sets based on the physical examination data where the ranges, slopes, and interobserver variability were modified. RESULTS: Of the 92 orthopedic articles identified, 58 articles (63%) did not clarify the ICC model used, and only 5 articles (5%) described all models, types, and measures. In reliability testing, although the popliteal angle showed a larger mean absolute difference than the Thomas test and the Staheli test, the ICC of popliteal angle was higher, which was believed to be contrary to the context of measurement. In addition, the ICC values were affected by the model, type, and measures used. In simulated data sets, the ICC showed higher values when the range of data sets were larger, the slopes of the data sets were parallel, and the interobserver variability was smaller. CONCLUSIONS: Care should be taken when interpreting the absolute ICC values, i.e., a higher ICC does not necessarily mean less variability because the ICC values can also be affected by various factors. The authors recommend that researchers clarify ICC models used and ICC values are interpreted in the context of measurement.